SARATH CHANDRAN writes from Bangalore: It is not without irony that the announcement by the English Premier League of plans to play an extra round of fixtures abroad should come so soon after the launch of cricket’s Indian Premier League.

As testament to modern sport’s impending submersion into the quagmire of opportunistic capitalism, no finer instances can be had than these. Yet the sheer brazenness with which these ‘revolutionary concepts’ are introduced, the ludicrous explanations of the need for these monstrous afflictions and the final realization of the ultimate greed driving them leaves one gasping for air.

Economists and business-people exclaim that it’s been coming for ages and then proceed to sound off about demand and supply, the quality of the ‘product’ and maximization of revenue.

A ‘product’?

To those guiding it’s destiny today, sport it appears, is no different from toilet paper or a sharp knife. It is a product, to be bunged into boxes, marketed and sold in whichever way as to maximize profit. Beautiful, capricious, uplifting sport is being methodically, mercilessly squeezed, it’s essence collected, adulterated and sold by the bottle.

So who stands to gain the most?

Fairly obvious, really. Let us look at the case of the Indian Premier League. The common cricket fan is by no means a stakeholder in this venture. The only cricketers who stand to make a sizable packet are the already grossly overpaid ‘superstars’ of the Indian team and the handful of foreign imports. But mostly the cash generated will serve only to further inflate the bursting coffers of the BCCI and a handful of individuals who are scarcely in dire need of the stuff.

And what of the effect on the game itself? If the IPL grows as the ‘all knowing ones’ predict and the BCCI throws some of its loose change at the other cricket boards, it could well take up most of the cricketing calendar. Money will dictate that all cricketers become Twenty20 specialists and Test cricket will be given a swift burial, mourned by all.

The character of the game will irrevocably change and, in a decade, flashing lights, bright colours, wildly swinging bats, three-hour games could well be all that cricket will be reduced to.

And what price the English premier football league? Predictably, a very stiff one. It is the most successful football league in the world (here read success = $$$$) whose revenue figures move steeply upwards every year. Apparently not steeply enough. Hence the contemptibly absurd idea of playing an extra round of matches outside the British isles.

Any pretence that this idea is about anything other than money is ridiculous in the extreme. Again in this case, the only people who stand to make any substantial gains are the premier league and particularly its big clubs. None of the club’s fans back home will see a dime and football in England below the premier league will remain entirely unaffected.

So then, if they start playing one fixture abroad, why not two? Then again, five is a good figure. Heck, why not just call yourselves “The Scudamore Circus” and hit the road. One night in Tokyo, the next in New York! Of all the nonsensical dim-witted plots ever hatched, this one’s numero uno. Thankfully it seems football’s governing bodies still maintain some vestiges of sanity and have opposed the idea. So maybe the circus won’t be rolling into town after all.

It is of course essential that people involved in sport full-time make a decent living out of it. But when the primary purpose of sport becomes monetary gain, things go too far. It’s a thin line between the sufficient and the excessive which we would do well to stay within.

For by crossing it, we rob sport of its considerable glory and leave ourselves much poorer for it, whatever anyone’s bank balance may say.

16 comments

The success of EPL has been exploiting fan interest in clubs and then marketing it better, and further.

The IPL tries to convert existing fan interest in international cricket (between countries) into interest in cricket involving international cricketers (between random teams).

I for one, am completely unenthused by the supposed Bangalore “Royal Challengers” team. Apart from Rahul Dravid and the Bangalore city name, there is nothing in the team to make Bangaloreans identify with the team. Besides, it makes me violently sick to see Bangalore being identified by a Brand of beer. Seems more like supporting Mallya’s team than supporting a Bangalorean team.

At least ICL encourages teams to have more local cricketers. IPL does not seem to have any place for Bangalorean cricketers, apart from those already representing india… and as Mukul Kesavan pointed out in an article some time back… I won’t be praying for Nathan Bracken to get Tendulkar out anytime soon!

it is better off watching a movie than this IPL tamaasha.
20-20 cricket league is welcome, but it should have been an exclusive domestic competition. take for example STANFORD 20-20 LEAGUE IN WEST INDIES. it is a good concept.
IPL will not serve any purpose in developing new talent in india.
i sincerely hope for cricket’s sake that this venture is a flop.

It is a great initiative by bcci and I hope it succeeds and replaces the existing international structure. I don’t see anything inherently wrong in sport being run for profit. After all, it is a form of entertainment and quality of entertainment can be good only when there is profit in it for those running it.
As for death of Test cricket being “mourned by all”, mourned by no one is closer to reality. How many people have the time or patience to watch Test cricket? India won a great victory at Perth in the recent series. The final day of the match happened to be on a Saturday and a national holiday to boot (Muharram). So you would expect the whole nation to be glued to the TV sets, watching the gripping action, right? Wrong. Go see the TRP ratings for that week and test match is no where in the top *hundred* programs of the week. Republic day parade at the same day, same time, next week had a higher TRP than Test match!

At the funeral of a major industrialist, a young person asked a senior executive what was going to happen to their company now that the big boss was no more. The senior executive is reported to have said, ‘The same thing that happened to psychoanalysis after Sigmund Freud died.’

I am reminded of that quote as the media, after hoisting IPL as the next big thing in cricket just yesterday, is pulling it down. Test cricket will go on and on. One-day cricket did not kill Test cricket, it made it more interesting. It brought in hardhitting batsmen, faster run rates, better fielding, and lots of results. T20 is going to do the same to one-day cricket.

Watching all the moolah, you really must thank “market forces” for unleashing much needed competition. Would BCCI have done this if it weren’t for the World Cup crash followed by Zee’s ICL push? Unlikely. The sight of rank greenhorns getting so much dough is not quite pleasing, but who are we to complain if there’s somebody willing to pay.

This auction thing is really astounding. Are you a good sport if you let people price you, or are you a good sport if you play for the spirit of the game? T20, One dayers and test cricket would probably continue –each with their place in the sun. As time goes by, I tend to think the “money” value for each of them would be in the reverse order, with test cricket carrying premium prices (both matches and players) –much like antiques and collector’s items.
The only saddening thought is why people don’t aution and bid for say a musician’s concert, staging of plays and so on. The entire thing reeks of kickbacks and I don’t mean the commercial value of cricketers as brand ambassadors alone.

This represents the commoditization of cricket just like other major sports. I think we need to give this concept some more time to see how it evolves. Top businessmen and celebrities would not have shown too much interest if they did not see potential. I believe different forms of cricket would co-exist at least for a while. Along the way one can hope policies and rules are changed to ensure more local representation.

C’on guys….IPL i think the best thing ever happened to Indian Cricket after 1983 and 2007 world cup wins.

I really don’t understand why so much fuss……..about money? R we jealous? Some one also commented ‘cricket will no longer be a gentleman’s game.’. come on…………… This is an experiment happening and believe me its gonna be big one.

But yes there are faults here in bidding……they shold have been preference given to cities to own their cricketers like Robin Uthappa for b’lore or Bhajji for Mohali etc which may pushed city based loyalties to an extra level. But nothing is still lost. Still in the next season the cities can re-bid for some cricketers and own them as it’s happening in European football clubs.

I am glad that what ever happening ..all this big money and lime light, more prime time is given to cricket …. is happening and its happening in India. I sincerely don’t believe test cricket will die…the similar scare was there when one-day cricket was on its high in late 80s and early 90s.But what happened? it is still there alive and kicking…..Still superstars like Yuvraj singh desperately wanted to get into test team even after he judged as one one of the biggest match winners of all time in one-dayers. Why? just because it is rightly called ‘TEST Cricket’.

What ever the new mode or format of cricket come but i still believe Test cricket is real cricket. But that will not stop me of enjoying 20-20 cricket even though i do feel sorry for bowlers in this format.

Lot of talks going on in Electronic media about what will happen for other sports. I think the popularity of Cricket today is not only due to our success in world cups or remarkable feasts achieved by cricketers like Kapil Dev( First one to reach 431 test wickets and score 5000 or more test runs )or Sunil Gavaskar (first to reach 10000 runs in tests). But other sports disastrous performance in the world stage also contributed immensely.

What are we getting worked up over? The going rate for an NFL franchise, in the US, if one can be had, is >$500 million. MLB last year signed up a Japanese major league pitcher for a 10 year $120 million contract. NBA’s league MVP LeBron James is sitting pretty on a multi-year $80 million contract. Last year’s NFL’s First Round First Pick – JaMarcus Russel, LSU QB and now QB of the Oakland Raiders – held out till a few days before the 2007 season opener and had his way with a 5-year >$40 million contract with a $20 million guarantee. These are extremely talented athletes and play very hard fought games. Compared to that our cricketers are certainly not in the same league and are having it too easy. There are certainly big-time mismatches. The European football clubs do hand out big bucks, but in comparison Rugby Union/League and Oz Rules footy players don’t make as much. It’s a question of what the public wants to see is willing to pay for. Twenty20 had better be dynamite stuff with lots of action – both batting and bowling. Or else these ‘stars’ and their ‘clubs’ will fall by the wayside. Money should be made, and marketing cricket aggressively is good. Sadly in India given the poor rewards for genuine athleticism, soporific standards of sporting talent rule.

You want to see the end of Test Cricket, just look around the empty stands at Mohali. If it hadn’t been for the 5000 free tickets handed out to school kids the place would have been empty, despite the draw of Tendulkar breaking the all-time run record. In India, the only thing keeping Test cricket viable are the Tv revenues, which ironically are kept at record highs because advertisers find the format of Test cricket “attractive” (ie they can squeeze a whole lot of ads in). It seems the people are watching, they’re just not prepared to do so in the baking sun on concrete slabs.